Re: [Gnu-arch-users] We should rename arch to "jla"

[Matthew Dempsky]

address@hidden (James Blackwell) writes:

> I lied. Sorry. But now that I've got your attention.....

"jlo" would have been a catchier name (and "jba" would have made more
sense).

> Have *you* tried 1.2.2rc1 yet? I've received only one email so far
> reporting on 1.2.2rc1 behavior. I need for there to be a lot more
> testing.

The only testing I've done is the test framework, but here's what I've
found.

Debian Stable and Testing machines running x86 hardware both compiled
everything fine.

A NetBSD machine on x86 hardware compiled everything fine as long as
you use GNU's patch, diff, diff3, tar, and make.

The only machine I couldn't get tla to build on is my school shell account:

    {apache:/tmp/tla-1.2.2rc1/src/=build} ../configure
    grep: illegal option -- q
    Usage: grep -hblcnsviw pattern file . . .
    grep: illegal option -- E
    grep: illegal option -- e
    Usage: grep -hblcnsviw pattern file . . .
    ERROR: ill-formed distribution name in /tmp/tla-1.2.2rc1/src/../=RELEASE-ID.
    {apache:/tmp/tla-1.2.2rc1/src/=build}  uname -a
    SunOS apache 5.9 Generic_112233-12 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Fire-880

(The same thing happens on ftp.gnu.org's tla-1.2.1 too though.)